Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Changes to the Atlantides Feed Aggregators

Feeds for the following resources have been added to the Atlantides Feed Aggregators:
I've removed Digital Humanities Quarterly from the Electra aggregator because its feed refreshes on a nearly daily basis and each time the entries for the previously published issue are updated to the refresh date. This has the effect of keeping the latest issue of DHQ hovering near the top of the Electra feed long past its publication date, defeating the purpose of the aggregator.

Friday, December 3, 2010

Changes to Electra and Maia Atlantis

This morning I've added the following blogs to the Electra Atlantis feed aggregator:

Thanks to Adam Brin at Digital Antiquity for alerting me to their existence.

I have updated feed addresses in Electra for the following blogs, which have changed recently:

I have also removed the following blogs for the reasons indicated:

  • Tom Goskar's Past Thinking blog as the feed URL is returning no data even though the site itself appears to be up
  • The feed URL for the Center for Digital Research in the Humanities (Univ. of Nebraska-Lincoln) is returning an error 500
  • The Abzu feed URL is returning 404
  • Sheila Brennan's Relaxing on the Trail has had its permissions reset so that it is no longer accessible.
  • Notis Toufexis' blog seems to have disappeared.

I have added the following blogs to the Maia Atlantis feed aggregator:


    Wednesday, December 1, 2010

    Flavia Faustina, version 3: chi-rho, dolium, multiple editors, rationale

    Ryan Baumann and Georgia Tsouvala have joined the mob!

    Ryan forked my Mob Epigraphy repository on github and added markup to the EpiDoc XML file to represent the Chi-Rho and dolium(?) that appear below the inscribed text. Then he sent me a pull request. I merged his changes and pushed them back to github, and then I pushed a few more modifications to show his contribution in the EpiDoc/TEI header and to modify the stylesheets to handle whitespace and multiple editors better (and to write out an HTML doctype). Here's the result:
    Ryan's change -- which parallels the treatment in ICVR II as reported via EDB -- raises some questions in my mind:
    1. Is the second illustration really a dolium? It doesn't look that much like what's illustrated at Why would a dolium appear on a Christian sepulchral inscription? Maybe someone like Sebastian Heath or Charlotte Tupman will have an idea about that.
    2. Are those two items really glyphs that should be "read" as part of the inscription and therefore marked up using the TEI "g" element (as Ryan has done), or should they be treated as figures or illustrations and therefore marked up a different way? If they are "glyphs", then what would be the corresponding glyph definition markup (if any) and where should it go in an EpiDoc file? Maybe someone like Gabriel Bodard or Marion Lamé will have an opinion about that.
    Meanwhile, Georgia wrote to me as follows:
    I like version 2. For one, I could see it and read it without any problems; something I could not do with version 1. I like the idea of being able to see pictures, texts, and translations of inscriptions on a single page. My question is: what are you trying to do here? What's the purpose, goal, etc. of Mob Epigraphy? And how can others help, contribute, etc.?
    My goal with Mob Epigraphy is two-fold. First, I want to create more on-line, open examples of real inscriptions marked up in EpiDoc. Secondly, I want to see how far we can push an openly collaborative model in the practice of digital epigraphy, welcoming all interested parties in editing the text and pushing the boundaries on what we can and can't do with standard encoding and web publication.

    How to contribute? There are many ways. This post highlights two examples. Ryan saw something missing and, exploiting the digital collaboration infrastructure provided by github, pitched in to fill the gap. Georgia had comments and questions and, after having some trouble with Blogger's comment functionality, sent me an email. Both are great ways to contribute, and I bet readers of this post can come up with more -- like suggesting answers to my questions above, or proposing more robust or interesting documentation of the inscription or elaboration of the encoding or HTML representation.

    Previous post.

    Flavia Faustina, version 2: style

    This is a follow-on to my initial posting about the Flavia Faustina inscription from St. Paul's Outside the Walls in Rome. Another contribution to the "Mob Epigraphy" thread. Still a mob of one, alas ... if you see something you think could be done better -- epigraphically or technically -- please chime in! There are deliberate (and no doubt accidental) omissions and mistakes.

    Not much substantive change, just style and inline image: